Although I’m a very liberal democrat who generally supports Warren’s views, I find her ongoing claim of having Native American heritage to be an embarrassment at best, and outright fraud at worst. Six-to-ten generations back? Give me a break! Nearly everyone who has ancestors in North America can make that claim WITH substantiation from Ancestry.com. It sounds like she has LESS N.A. blood than the average American. She needs to drop it and apologize. Efforts towards equal opportunity are severely damaged when people - especially those for whom they were not intended - lie and abuse them.
The fact that she is digging in her heels over this has caused her to lose my vote. And seeing left-leaning media outlets still defending her on this is equally disturbing. Actual native Americans must be rolling their eyes.
I guess I’m not seeing this. She spends her whole life until 2012 AFAICT barely mentioning her family history – it’s unclear to me if she mentioned it in public at all. Then Scott Brown found somewhere where she wrote it down, calls her a liar about it, and suddenly she’s answering for it in public. Then Trump calls her a liar about it, and she’s still answering for it in public. Over, and over, and over.
It seems that faulting Warren for fixating on her relatively inconsequential Native American family history is a lot like faulting Hillary for fixating on her e-mails and Benghazi, or Obama’s weird fixation on his birth certificate. I agree with DominicCobb it’s a strategic failing to let your opponents decide what you’re talking about. She had a 1/32 or less Native American genetic makeup, and she told the truth about that, and then she was called a liar about it, and now she just proved it. Now the subject is changing to 1/32 not being enough, so why’d she make such a big stink about it? But the thing is, she didn’t bring it up in the first place.
IMO there’s a lot of “I know that, I just want to hear him deny it.” in this story.
But I REALLY don’t understand certain media outlets heralding that these latest DNA results prove that she was right, because they most certainly do not. Quite the contrary.
Her claim was that her great, great, great grandmother was at least part Native American. The highest genetic percentage she could possibly ever have been talking about this entire time was 1/32, but it also could have been less. So I think the latest DNA results support her claim very clearly. How does it not? Maybe the media oversimplified the issue so much that people thought she was talking about a larger percentage than she really was?